Adam Walsh Act Add to Watch List Options

[eagerly]

Angie Y Shane..may I know what was your sex offense if thats ok? Was wondering what tier is your offense classified, that made USCIS approve your petition though you fall under the Adam Walsh Act?

I thought that those required to register in the state are considered high risk predator. I am scared asking the law enforcement office for they might forced me to register even though I am not required.My probation was discharged prior to the required registration period which is 1995. I got discharged in 1993.

[Eric1212]

OK, so I will take a stab at this havning been a member of ACLU for a long time.

Anything, anything that is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is subject to judicial review. It is a statutory set of documents, albeit written by bureaucrats (sometimes lawyers) that lay out what the rules and regulations are regarding what the agency or regulatory body does and how it will do it.

All departments within the Executive Branch have them in some form or another, including USCIS, DOL, DOS, etc....

So, as a result, they are subject to the due process clause in the US Constitution which says the government shall not deny due process of law. So this is the basis behind a denial of rights for someone who is subject to AWA and any decision made by USCIS, including being a GITMO detainee.

Article 14 deals with how States shall handle the rights of its citizens; Article 5 deals with how the federal government will do so. Both have similar language, to wit:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this would not apply to an immigrant coming to the US but it would apply to a citizen who is applying to sponsor someone coming to the US. So I agree that those who said there are no rights with regard to an immigrant. But there are substantive and procedural rights guaranteed to the citizen who sponsors one. (The words life, liberty, and property come to mind....)

USCIS can make a decision yes or no as to whether they feel such a relationship is fit. But they are subject to review and appeal under the Constitution. There are some hurdles because of some precedent, namely sovereign immunity (you can't sue the government) but unfortunately for the government that has already been branched many times.

The social contract provided for in Common law allows that when the Kind has not protected his citizens, the citizens can redress the King.

A good constitutional lawyer will help.

Oh, and I would not register with the police unless I was statutorily required to do so. Just make sure you are right in that judgement.

Now go forth and sin no more.....

[eagerly]

I went down to inquire about the SOR in my state and good thing is that I am not required to register. But I was told that they cant issue a Certificate stating that I am not a Risk. Went to sheriffs office btw.

In my readings on the forum, I encountered one saying that those falling under AWA are not eligible to petition, then why didnt they stated that when the form was being filled up. By then, petitioner should not file no more and paid for the fee. It is good if you presented all the evidences they need and get the approval. But if it is just a formality and deny you eventually, its not fair. Appealing the case still entails more fees, lawyers and court perspective.

I dont intend to sin no more...lol but I feel that I am a living dead..my right to be with my wife is being questioned. The rights to vote, travel outside the country etc. have been taken away. Some could hardly get a job but this deprivation of the right to happiness tends me to question..why can a sinner be given a chance to a second life. Sorry for being emotional. I am not petitioning for K1, I am petitioning my wife who is already here in US. If they deny my petition, I hate to see her get deported.

So Mr. ACLU member, is it really true that a convicted felon still have the rights? or is it just written down in the constitution?

OK, so I will take a stab at this havning been a member of ACLU for a long time.

Anything, anything that is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is subject to judicial review. It is a statutory set of documents, albeit written by bureaucrats (sometimes lawyers) that lay out what the rules and regulations are regarding what the agency or regulatory body does and how it will do it.

All departments within the Executive Branch have them in some form or another, including USCIS, DOL, DOS, etc....

So, as a result, they are subject to the due process clause in the US Constitution which says the government shall not deny due process of law. So this is the basis behind a denial of rights for someone who is subject to AWA and any decision made by USCIS, including being a GITMO detainee.

Article 14 deals with how States shall handle the rights of its citizens; Article 5 deals with how the federal government will do so. Both have similar language, to wit:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this would not apply to an immigrant coming to the US but it would apply to a citizen who is applying to sponsor someone coming to the US. So I agree that those who said there are no rights with regard to an immigrant. But there are substantive and procedural rights guaranteed to the citizen who sponsors one. (The words life, liberty, and property come to mind....)

USCIS can make a decision yes or no as to whether they feel such a relationship is fit. But they are subject to review and appeal under the Constitution. There are some hurdles because of some precedent, namely sovereign immunity (you can't sue the government) but unfortunately for the government that has already been branched many times.

The social contract provided for in Common law allows that when the Kind has not protected his citizens, the citizens can redress the King.

A good constitutional lawyer will help.

Oh, and I would not register with the police unless I was statutorily required to do so. Just make sure you are right in that judgement.

Now go forth and sin no more.....

[NArocks]

Eagerly you are psoting all over the place hun, take a moment. Which type of Visa are you applying for? Answer to us here what was the offense as there are many different ways to go depending on the charges.

Yes a convicted felony has rights and can have those rights restored , however paperwork needs to be filled out and sent to the appropiate authorities.

[nonversation]

I went down to inquire about the SOR in my state and good thing is that I am not required to register. But I was told that they cant issue a Certificate stating that I am not a Risk. Went to sheriffs office btw.

In my readings on the forum, I encountered one saying that those falling under AWA are not eligible to petition, then why didnt they stated that when the form was being filled up. By then, petitioner should not file no more and paid for the fee. It is good if you presented all the evidences they need and get the approval. But if it is just a formality and deny you eventually, its not fair. Appealing the case still entails more fees, lawyers and court perspective.

I dont intend to sin no more...lol but I feel that I am a living dead..my right to be with my wife is being questioned. The rights to vote, travel outside the country etc. have been taken away. Some could hardly get a job but this deprivation of the right to happiness tends me to question..why can a sinner be given a chance to a second life. Sorry for being emotional. I am not petitioning for K1, I am petitioning my wife who is already here in US. If they deny my petition, I hate to see her get deported.

So Mr. ACLU member, is it really true that a convicted felon still have the rights? or is it just written down in the constitution?

OK, so I will take a stab at this havning been a member of ACLU for a long time.

Anything, anything that is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is subject to judicial review. It is a statutory set of documents, albeit written by bureaucrats (sometimes lawyers) that lay out what the rules and regulations are regarding what the agency or regulatory body does and how it will do it.

All departments within the Executive Branch have them in some form or another, including USCIS, DOL, DOS, etc....

So, as a result, they are subject to the due process clause in the US Constitution which says the government shall not deny due process of law. So this is the basis behind a denial of rights for someone who is subject to AWA and any decision made by USCIS, including being a GITMO detainee.

Article 14 deals with how States shall handle the rights of its citizens; Article 5 deals with how the federal government will do so. Both have similar language, to wit:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this would not apply to an immigrant coming to the US but it would apply to a citizen who is applying to sponsor someone coming to the US. So I agree that those who said there are no rights with regard to an immigrant. But there are substantive and procedural rights guaranteed to the citizen who sponsors one. (The words life, liberty, and property come to mind....)

USCIS can make a decision yes or no as to whether they feel such a relationship is fit. But they are subject to review and appeal under the Constitution. There are some hurdles because of some precedent, namely sovereign immunity (you can't sue the government) but unfortunately for the government that has already been branched many times.

The social contract provided for in Common law allows that when the Kind has not protected his citizens, the citizens can redress the King.

A good constitutional lawyer will help.

Oh, and I would not register with the police unless I was statutorily required to do so. Just make sure you are right in that judgement.

Now go forth and sin no more.....

If convicted of a sexual offense, Per the Adam Walsh Act, you are not allowed to petition for a fiance' or spouse. Luckly, the rules changed recently. If you can prove you are not a "threat" such as another user here has, they will allow it.

Some of the things they require

psycological evaluation saying they find nothing wrong with you

Reccomendation letters

letter from your fiance/spouse that she knows about your past and understands it (in her own words)

Live scan finger prints

Court documents of your case


Basicly you have to come up with every shred of proof that you are not a "threat" to her (not sure how you could be a threat to another consenting adult, but this is how they work)


The good news here is you were not instantly denied, just come up with over whelming proof that this is behind you, and that you are a good person and send it on.

I'm surprised you got that far without a lawyer, you were not just fully denied, looks if you can send these things you might get approved, be thankful



This post has been edited by nonversation: Sep 25 2009, 09:52 PM

[Angie Y Shane]

Listen i found a big piece of evidence that works great is a updated polygraph test stating you have not re offended since completion of probation or treatment. POLYGRAPHS are considered great sources of evidence when showing truthful intent in your seriousness of behavior. Treatment providers use them for sex offenders to make sure they are not re offending in the community.

Polygraphs are also greatly respected in the immigration officers eye's because that is also part of there hiring process from my understanding. So it's looked at as seriousness from the petitioner. When I was at the interview with my wife it was mentioned it was very intelligent on my behalf.

Shane Y Angie

[eagerly]

I committed a sexual offense against a minor (fondling - 3 seconds act) 20 years ago. I have evidences that would prove that I have changed. I have not violated any law since then. It was an act that cause me to live with out any rights at all. Yes it ruin my life for the 3 seconds act that I did. And I admit that it is a wrongful thing for me to do. I was 25 years old when i committed the offense. I am not required to register as SOR in my state.

I have no idea of getting those rights back.

Thanks

Eagerly you are psoting all over the place hun, take a moment. Which type of Visa are you applying for? Answer to us here what was the offense as there are many different ways to go depending on the charges.

Yes a convicted felony has rights and can have those rights restored , however paperwork needs to be filled out and sent to the appropiate authorities.

[Eric1212]

I went down to inquire about the SOR in my state and good thing is that I am not required to register. But I was told that they cant issue a Certificate stating that I am not a Risk. Went to sheriffs office btw.

In my readings on the forum, I encountered one saying that those falling under AWA are not eligible to petition, then why didnt they stated that when the form was being filled up. By then, petitioner should not file no more and paid for the fee. It is good if you presented all the evidences they need and get the approval. But if it is just a formality and deny you eventually, its not fair. Appealing the case still entails more fees, lawyers and court perspective.

I dont intend to sin no more...lol but I feel that I am a living dead..my right to be with my wife is being questioned. The rights to vote, travel outside the country etc. have been taken away. Some could hardly get a job but this deprivation of the right to happiness tends me to question..why can a sinner be given a chance to a second life. Sorry for being emotional. I am not petitioning for K1, I am petitioning my wife who is already here in US. If they deny my petition, I hate to see her get deported.

So Mr. ACLU member, is it really true that a convicted felon still have the rights? or is it just written down in the constitution?

OK, so I will take a stab at this havning been a member of ACLU for a long time.

Anything, anything that is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is subject to judicial review. It is a statutory set of documents, albeit written by bureaucrats (sometimes lawyers) that lay out what the rules and regulations are regarding what the agency or regulatory body does and how it will do it.

All departments within the Executive Branch have them in some form or another, including USCIS, DOL, DOS, etc....

So, as a result, they are subject to the due process clause in the US Constitution which says the government shall not deny due process of law. So this is the basis behind a denial of rights for someone who is subject to AWA and any decision made by USCIS, including being a GITMO detainee.

Article 14 deals with how States shall handle the rights of its citizens; Article 5 deals with how the federal government will do so. Both have similar language, to wit:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this would not apply to an immigrant coming to the US but it would apply to a citizen who is applying to sponsor someone coming to the US. So I agree that those who said there are no rights with regard to an immigrant. But there are substantive and procedural rights guaranteed to the citizen who sponsors one. (The words life, liberty, and property come to mind....)

USCIS can make a decision yes or no as to whether they feel such a relationship is fit. But they are subject to review and appeal under the Constitution. There are some hurdles because of some precedent, namely sovereign immunity (you can't sue the government) but unfortunately for the government that has already been branched many times.

The social contract provided for in Common law allows that when the Kind has not protected his citizens, the citizens can redress the King.

A good constitutional lawyer will help.

Oh, and I would not register with the police unless I was statutorily required to do so. Just make sure you are right in that judgement.

Now go forth and sin no more.....

Yes, a convicted felon still has rights, including the right to due process. Rights (not privileges -- there is a difference) are taken away usually by State fiat.

It is quite a remark upon our society that some people who are convicted of the most heinous of crimes get a pardon from the governor of their state, having some kind of connection, bribery being one of them. I have seen it. And those who are the most redeemable, do not. I didn't say it was perfect, only that it is possible.

But you do have the right to due process. The right to vote is State given, as are most of the rights you listed that you have lost. If you can find a hook in the process, drive a truck through it. That's all I can say. You need a good constitutional lawyer. And the right forum to present your case.

In view of Roman Polanski being hauled back to the US after the judge reneged on a deal he was given, I quite agree that there is little justice in the world. That's why I joined the ACLU. I haven't always agreed with them. But they have a place....

My observation of those who win have showed a remarkable stubborness about, not whether they had rights, but whether they were done wrong. The way to win is to convince the rightness of your point of view, rather than the rights you believe you have.

You have a long road ahead of you. Good luck.....

[Perplexed]

The Equal Protection Clause of the 14th ammendment ensures that anyone in the United States legally is protected by the constitution and is guaranteed to enjoy the same rights as a US citizen, except they cannot vote or hold some political offices. I'm not sure you were saying that in your post below. Otherwise, people here with visas would be incredibly discriminated against! The Equal Protection clause in relation to people here illegally is debatable.

OK, so I will take a stab at this havning been a member of ACLU for a long time.

Anything, anything that is in the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) is subject to judicial review. It is a statutory set of documents, albeit written by bureaucrats (sometimes lawyers) that lay out what the rules and regulations are regarding what the agency or regulatory body does and how it will do it.

All departments within the Executive Branch have them in some form or another, including USCIS, DOL, DOS, etc....

So, as a result, they are subject to the due process clause in the US Constitution which says the government shall not deny due process of law. So this is the basis behind a denial of rights for someone who is subject to AWA and any decision made by USCIS, including being a GITMO detainee.

Article 14 deals with how States shall handle the rights of its citizens; Article 5 deals with how the federal government will do so. Both have similar language, to wit:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Now this would not apply to an immigrant coming to the US but it would apply to a citizen who is applying to sponsor someone coming to the US. So I agree that those who said there are no rights with regard to an immigrant. But there are substantive and procedural rights guaranteed to the citizen who sponsors one. (The words life, liberty, and property come to mind....)

USCIS can make a decision yes or no as to whether they feel such a relationship is fit. But they are subject to review and appeal under the Constitution. There are some hurdles because of some precedent, namely sovereign immunity (you can't sue the government) but unfortunately for the government that has already been branched many times.

The social contract provided for in Common law allows that when the Kind has not protected his citizens, the citizens can redress the King.

A good constitutional lawyer will help.

Oh, and I would not register with the police unless I was statutorily required to do so. Just make sure you are right in that judgement.

Now go forth and sin no more.....

[greg55]

Trust me for greg55, you need a updated polygraph and evaluation. Do you currently register for a sex offender? If you do, are you considered a high risk offender or non web site registry offender. This means do you have to be listed on state sex offender web site. National sex offender web site, or local state police? These are factors in there behalf they search for. Trust me I know, I beat the act.

I would like to ask you a question , would you mind answering it???

What were you charged with ? I'm just curious if charges make a difference when it comes to IMBRA

Example would a person convicted of having sex with a small child , be judged differently from a person that had consensual sex under the legal age limit of a particular state?

Or would they seem them both as the same ? You don't have to answer if you dont feel comfortable but I feel it would help many cases if you could.

I gave cocaine to a minor and 3 of us as well as the minor played strip poker...